The awarding of this year’s Nobel prizes has raised eyebrows in the scientific community. Demis Hassabis and John Jumper, both from Google’s DeepMind, along with US biochemist David Baker, were awarded the Nobel Prize in Chemistry for their work decoding microscopic protein structures. Meanwhile, ex-Google researcher Geoffrey Hinton bagged the Nobel Prize in Physics, shared with US physicist John Hopfield.
“The Nobel committee doesn’t want to miss out on this AI stuff,” said Professor Dame Wendy Hall, a computer scientist and AI advisor to the United Nations. However, she questions the appropriateness of the categories. “It’s very creative of them to push Geoffrey through the physics route,” she added.
The concern is also shared by Noah Giansiracusa, an associate maths professor at Bentley University. “What Hinton did was phenomenal, but was it physics? I don’t think so,” Giansiracusa noted.
This controversy brings to light limitations within the Nobel Prize framework. Established in the 19th century, it has not evolved to include modern fields like computer science or data science.
Beyond the Nobel debate, Big Tech’s influence on scientific research is also under scrutiny. Google, with its large resources, has been outpacing traditional academia in AI research output.
Hinton himself expressed concerns about unchecked AI development after leaving Google in 2023. “AI could surpass human intelligence sooner than we expect,” he warned.
Giansiracusa calls for more public investment in research. He criticises Big Tech’s focus on profit over innovation. “So much of Big Tech is not oriented towards the next deep-learning breakthrough, but making money by pushing chatbots or putting ads all over the internet,” he said.
As AI continues to transform society and industries, calls for new Nobel categories such as computer science or AI are growing louder. “These scientists deserve recognition, but the committee needs to modernise,” said Professor Hall.
The dominance of Big Tech in AI research raises questions about the future of scientific discovery. Will it be driven by profit-oriented corporations or by publicly funded universities? Hinton’s departure from Google and his subsequent warnings about the potential misuse of AI underscore these concerns.
Traditional institutions, such as universities and publicly funded research centres, are struggling to compete with the pace and resources of Big Tech. There is a growing call for governments to provide more robust support for independent research, ensuring that the future of AI and science remains a balanced effort between the private and public sectors.
The Nobel Prize committee’s choice to award AI breakthroughs under existing categories like physics and chemistry underscores the need to modernise. This could involve establishing new categories that reflect rapid advancements in fields like AI and computer science. Such changes could ensure that the Nobel Prizes continue to be seen as the pinnacle of achievement, recognising breakthroughs that are shaping our future.
Neuroscientist reveals a new way to manifest more financial abundance
Breakthrough Columbia study confirms the brain region is 250 million years old, the size of a walnut and accessible inside your brain right now.
